CES 2012: Hands on with Canon PowerShot G1 X and Nikon D4

Dpreview is covering this year's Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in las Vegas Nevada, and the first event in our busy calendar was the Pepcom Digital Experience exhibition on Monday evening, where many of this year's exhibitors gather to give the delegates a taste of their latest and greatest products. We were there, and we took the opportunity to grab some hands-on time with two of this year's biggest CES releases - Canon's Powershot G1 X and Nikon's professional-level D4.

Canon PowerShot G1 X

The PowerShot G1 X handles much like the PowerShot G12. However, its fixed 28-112mm (equivalent) zoom and fully-articulated rear LCD are coupled with a sensor only slightly smaller than that used in Canon's APS-C format EOS DSLRs.

Despite its almost DSLR-sized CMOS sensor, the 14MP PowerShot G1 X doesn't feel much larger, in the hand, than recent PowerShot G-series compacts.

Although it is more angular in design than recent PowerShot models, the G1 X offers basically the same control layout as the G12 and also features an optical viewfinder with diopter adjustment.

In this view you can see the G1 X's flash hotshoe, and one of the features of recent G-series PowerShots that we like the most - generous chunky dials for adjusting exposure mode and exposure compensation. In the G1 X these dials are stacked, but the camera lacks the G12's dedicated ISO sensitivity dial.

The G1 X's rear LCD screen is fully articulated and boasts 920k dots. The red button at the camera's upper right is a direct movie shooting button.

We weren't actually able to use the G1 X in our limited time with this preproduction unit, but our first impressions are of a solid, well put-together camera which handles very nicely indeed. Although slightly larger and more angular than the G12, the G1 X doesn't feel much bigger in use, and we can't wait to get our hands on a production model for a full review.

Nikon D4

The 16MP Nikon D4 is the latest in a long line of professional SLRs going back to 1959. The fifth full-frame digital SLR from Nikon, the D4 follows in the footsteps of the 12MP D3S, and although the improvements to its still image shooting capabilities are relatively modest, the D4 boasts a completely overhauled movie mode and a host of ergonomic improvements.

The D4 looks different from the D3 and D3S, and its smoother, flatter lines hide meaningful internal changes too.

Most of the significant ergonomic changes have been made on the rear of the camera. Dual joysticks and a redesigned portrait-format grip, as well as illuminated buttons, all serve to make the D4 easier to use than its predecessors.

The D4's movie mode is seriously updated compared to the D3S. The new camera offers 1080p30 HD video at up to 24Mbps with uncompressed video output. A direct movie shooting button is positioned just behind the shutter release and on/off switch on the front of the hand grip.

The D4 is Nikon's fifth full-frame DSLR, and boasts its most sensitive sensor yet, offering a maximum ISO sensitivity setting of equivalent to ISO 204,800.

And here's a closeup of the new AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8, released at the same time as the D4.

The D4 is aimed at working professionals who make a living from their cameras and as such, it's a lot more camera than most enthusiasts will ever need. The improvements that Nikon has made to the user interface compared to the D3S mainly take the form of tweaks, rather than fundamental changes but when you live with a camera every hour of the day, small things can make a big difference. We're keen to get our hands on a production D4 for a full review as soon as possible.

Comments

GX1, G1X, XG1, X1G, 1GX, 1XG. C'mon manufacturers, time for some smarter approach. There are more letters in the alphabet to be used. Say B — not a bad one. There are not many cameras with B in their name. U is vey much free too. Z as well. O not much used since Olypmus OM.

Optical Tunnel (OVF) a must on such a small compact, which allows for the fastest possible on-track panning if following fast moving subjects, especially used when available light is prevalent; and uses no extra power, and makes use of telelens focal lengths.Doing this with a camera to the face is never as disorienting as the lag that can still exist on current EVFs for panning-tracking fast moving distant subjects.

I own a G12. If the OTF (Optical "Tunnel" Finder) on the G1X is anything like the G12 one might be able to track fast moving objects in available lighting, but a usable photo is a bit more difficult. 1.9 frame rate doesn't help. But then these aren't made for action. Really like the idea of this camera, it is perfect for my use if the IQ is good. Too bad about that 250 shot battery life...larger than the G12, and they utilize a smaller battery...what?

Than sell your lenses. If Canon comes out with a Mirror-less like the piece of junk Nikon came out with, you won't be able to use them on it anyway. Is your current camera so bad that you need to get a mirror-less? You do realize that a lens and an imagination are more important than a camera body?

The 4 good things in D4 is that first Nikon has been wasting their time by upping the resolution of the meter sensor for marketing purposes to 91,000 RGB pixels, second ergonomics, third less weight that D3S and finnaly the buttons are now backlit. But the most important thing in photografy is the quality and in that area Nikon is the best!!

This one is definitely the MOST BIZARRE Comments board I have ever encountered.I wish I had the wisdom to never ever have read through it, but I believe I am just so addicted to Dpreview that I would just read through anything.

@V3Addict you think they are not real Zeiss and they really are not Zeiss, these two things are different things. What you are saying is as stupid as me saying that Canon 1Dx is not real canon or nikon d4 is not real nikon.

(1) Carl Zeiss simply don't have the knowhow to design a modern lens. from 1970s the Carl Zeiss brand lenses have been made by several third-class Japanese makers.

(2) third-class Japanese makers are still better than the best of the rest of the world but by marketing their products in a shame brand of someone else, Leica or Zeiss, they effectively say that these lenses are not as competitive as other Japanese makers' products. simple isn't it?

yabokkie , the discussion is whether they are real or not. Whether Zeiss lenses are good enough is another debate. If his logic has to extended then Nikon D4 is certainly not real Nikon because the most important thing in it, the sensor, is manufactured outside of Nikon. But it is absurd to call D4 as not of nikon just because it is manufactured by someone else under nikon's guidance.

My comments are... The Nikon looks very good,but watch out for SONY, their A77 looks incredibly inviting, and the FF model, the A99, later this year, at 37mp, and 12fps, 2.5mp EVF, full 1080p recording up to 60fps for super-smooth HDTV videos... And we have yet to see what Canon has in store for us. This is the year, that these big-3 players better put forward their very best stuff, or folks will be switching around a bit... Self included... I've been a Nikon guy for 20 years, and a Canon digital guy for the last 15 years... And I'm getting itchy for a possible change, except if Canon get really aggressive with their 5D3 and 7D2 replacements...

Was a D4 prototype on the table at CES 2011? Was it at Photokina? Any product can be released at any time, despite the rumors. X100 was announced completely out of the blue and 12 months later we have 4 siblings.

Sony, and maybe Panasonic, will kick these "flagship DSLRs" out of the market for good with 8K video, and people won't have to go to CES or Photokina, only joint press conference of Sony-ESPN for a future A666.

All these super-hyper-giga-mega pixel cameras are worth only if followed by first class lenses (and if you can afford these). Canon and Nikon are redesigning their lens line-up, but how many Sony lenses are really ready to follow 24, not to mention anticipated 37 Mpx sensors in A77/A99? Good lenses for NEX7? Only few. Literally.Wideangles? None!To by 1000+ dollars body with mediocre lenses and to downsize images in post-processing just to match their mediocracy? No, thank you. Adopted lenses are bad solution if you have to be quick, no matter how good they are. I have used 1.8/105mm Nikkor on EOS bodies for portraiture for a while, and if I had to manually stop lens down a little, final image was most often sharp at the wrong spot.

I'm always so impressed that some people can place a negative verdict about a camera they have never seen, held, or seen results from it.If you look at the quality of the camera's of today then it's very hard if not impossible to make huge improvements.Take 5 top camera's, make the same picture and print it on 1x1,5 meter and I dare every "specialist" to see the difference at a distance of 1 meter. I'm sure that no one can tell with picture comes from with camera.We all have preferences for one brand or another, but that doesn't mean that "not my brand" can't be good as well.

Maybe. But I can pick a RED or a 5D or 7D easily in video, though for stills it might be more difficult? Each camera does have it's own 'look', where those who use those models a lot would probably be able to tell and as for 'quality' - yes they all do have A quality to them, so does a Polaroid or a Holga... They all have A quality to them...

I own a small professional photo lab and in workshops I teach people how to set any camera so that you get a perfect balanced shot that needs no Photoshopping afterwards (in color and density). After taking pictures from a model I print the pictures on a Noritsu lab without corrections and believe me, no one can see which picture comes from which camera (and I'm doing this for quite some time).Most characteristics in pictures are made afterwards in Photoshop and depends on the personal preferences of the person behind the screen and the quality of the monitor and how well it's calibrated.If I take 100 random photo's made in DPreview tests from 10 different quality cameras there will be no one who can place the pictures with the right camera, except for a few lucky hits.

hmmm, removing ISO adjustments available in the past showing uninterrupted live exposure (sensitivity) simulation preview effects (on the go, image changes as one adusts instantly) not a good thing (they did the same thing to their EOS LV 60D... not good either)and the latter, being the first EOS LV dSLR with the PowerShot G's classic VASS (vari-angle swivel screen)... what gives Canon??Do we have to wait for the 'next' model iteration to see ISO button return (with retention of VASS)? G1XMkII and 70D?

Gotta say, it looks pretty good. Style/design in line with other G series cameras. I am curios what the minimum focusing distance is. It might make the G12 obsolete. The S100 has similar image quality to the G12. The cameras are getting better each generation!

I could almost forgive the slow zoom lens, but settle for a coke bottle OVF: never! Too bad. I had two great years with a G10, and I defected to Panasonic LX5 because at least there's an optional EVF. There's nothihg like being to bring the camera up to your face, steady it, and see all the exposure data you could ever want -- even including a histogram.

So what hypothetical off-duty pro is going to want one of these crippled G1Xs? Not I!

The G1X looks like it could be an interesting second camera, but the lack of an electronic viewfinder is a big negative for me. We have an S70 that we really like, except that the optical viewfinder doesn't accurately show the boundaries of the picture, and the LCD is hard to see in bright light. Thus, it is difficult to compose the shot the way you would like. With a good EVF, the G1X could be a compelling camera.

I expected EVF too. Guess Canon does not have the capacity to make them cheaply and rely on external sources.

However, to assume optical viewfinders as something awfully important for the average buyer is really a stretch. Most average buyers probably do not even know they can compose their images through the tiny viewfinders. LOL. The Sony NEX-5N, Panasonic GX1 and Nikon J1 all do not even have viewfinders.

This is the first iteration of this unit. Every year will likely bring something more to this camera, as is usually the case. Perhaps next year we'll see 24mm lens, maybe a larger screen, or other upgrades. All manufacturers drag things along so that they can make the most money while at the same time keep DSLR's still desirable. It's just that Canon does it more slowly than perhaps anyone else. Why? Because they can!Just my thoughts.

Indeed for the amount of sensor and lens is packs, not bad at all ! I don't know if i would ever use that tiny viewfinder though. Is a hard to see through VF really better than a *possibly* hard to see LCD ? (that is tiltable away from the sun btw.)

Is some of this stuff just copied over from Nikon? I'm interested in dpreview's observations but I believe most of us are aware that this camera is part of a long line of Nikon SLRs going back to 1959.

The most significant thing for me (on paper) about the D4's video is the ability to go uncompressed out via HDMI to a professional external recording device that will bypass the highly compressed internal capture that almost makes the potential of the large DSLR sensors redundant (in high end professional video applications, at least). If that output is 10bit 4:2:2 at 1080 and manual control during capture is good, then it suddenly becomes very interesting for pro video. Although more large sensor dedicated video cameras are steadily being released at competitive prices and interesting lens mount options. Still - looking forward to seeing it tested.Oh, and lets hope it does what it's designed for and takes great stills too ;-)

petrocan talks about the ideal lens having 100x zoom and as fast as 1.7. The problem is size and weight.Size (W x H x L)= 250.6 x 255.5 x 661.5mmWeight= 26.8kg (59.3lbs)It's hard to beat physics. Stronger optics to make a long lens smaller means thicker glass but if you want a wider shot the glass would need to be so close it would more than touch the next element.

But at the same time, the target audience is the same as for canons new 1Dx that costs more (or the same in the end) with simlar specs.It is quite easy for us sitting here complaining about the Price, but the fact is that the people that needs this kind of camera and (probably) makes money form photographing will buy it. The problem so far is that the D3s has been such an good camera that the existing D3s users will problably not move up to D4, unless they need one more body.

Well, its not just "any" compact. Pretty much almost APS-C size sensor.. even if lens wont be supergrade, it will still perform way better than any today compact (important part is today .. not sure about for example comparing this and Sony R1 :D).

In the press release, Nikon makes a big deal out of the fact that some of the autofocus points will focus with lenses dimmer than f/5.6; they say that some of them will work down to f/8. Canons, I know, also have issues with this.

However, every Olympus DSLR will quite happily autofocus at f/7 (even my old banged up E-510, with its 3-point AF sensor, 1 point cross sensitive). It'll even AF at f/11, using a f/5.6 lens with a 2x converter -- although it's slow in poor light.

Does Olympus have some sort of magic AF sensor? In my experience Olympus single-shot AF beats Canon's hands down (although continuous AF is a whole different story).

Sony A900 can focus with 500mm f8 lens. Without problems. Tho AF in A900 (or A850) is really good generally. When you put something like old 80-200mm HS on that, its so fast that you will get recoil from lens. :D (actually might be better to put it on slower AF, you can via menu, just to be sure)

Not sure why Canon is limited, I think it doesnt have anything to do with real limitation, maybe they just dont want users to be able to AF with slower lens so they could sell more expensive fast lens.

That's complete nonsense about Canon artificially limiting the AF on the 1D X to sell faster lenses, although I'm not sure what faster lenses you mean. It's a physical limitation of the new design. If the aperture is too small it can't get a large enough phase difference from each light ray coming from opposite sides of the aperture for accurate AF. There is talk they may be working to improve this so by the time 1D X ships it may at least be an option.

I think he's referring to the f/5.6 limit on non-pro bodies. It clearly *can* autofocus past f/5.6 to some degree, because if you tape off pins on a teleconverter to lie to the camera about the aperture, it'll AF.

Still not sure why the Olympus AF is reasonable all the way to f/11, though. If Olympus gets out of the SLR business it'll be interesting to see who they sell their tech to -- they have some underappreciated tricks.

It's not about AF at a specific aperture. What is refered to here is the ability of the camera to autofocus with lenses that have a maximum aperture of f8 or higher - this comes into play mainly with the use of teleconverters. If you have an f 2.8 or f4 or f 5.6 lens, etc, they will autofocus at any aperture as the camera actually focuses before the lens stops down - so the camera AF's using the max aperture of the lens (f2.8, f4, f 5.6 etc.). However, if, for example, I slap a 2X TC on a 300mm f4 lens, now I have a 600mm f8 lens which presents an AF problem for the new Canon but not the new Nikon.

I can use AF at f/11 with any Nikon body (D300, D80, D70) when I use f/5.6 lens and Kenko 2x teleconvertor, but the quality of AF at such conditions are not Nikon standard. Now at D4 Nikon has produced standard f/8 AF.

That D4 is a thing of beauty. Nikon really has the manufacture of rock solid pro bodies down. And I've always liked the round viewfinder with the eyepiece shutter. Much better than the cheesy cover that you slip on your neck strap.

D4 is certainly improved on D3s in style, but it's not a work of art that's for sure. However, that would not make one bit of difference if I were going to buy one. It's the performance that matters, not what it looks like.